Useful Load 89/90 Bravos 168LB increase

[NickG]

So my Bravo search is now starting in earnest. There are a few 89/90 early Bravos on the market and I have made inquiries on a couple of them. One has a UL of 830 lbs. No TKS or any other UL reducing equipment. The broker mentioned that it qualified for the UL takeoff weight increase of 168 Lbs by removing the flap gap seals and some paperwork but my reading of the Mooney paperwork from the factory web site is that it’s a lot more involved than that.

ive searched the forums here for answers but no one is quite answering these questions:

1. is it SN’s up to 107 that have this issue?

2. What does it actually take to get the 168 LB increase?

3. Are most of the early Bravos still operating with the lower UL?

I’m looking at newer airframes as well but right now the inventory is not exactly overstocked so I want to know which years to consider.

Thanks to the community in advance for your help.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, NickG said:

So my Bravo search is now starting in earnest. There are a few 89/90 early Bravos on the market and I have made inquiries on a couple of them. One has a UL of 830 lbs. No TKS or any other UL reducing equipment. The broker mentioned that it qualified for the UL takeoff weight increase of 168 Lbs by removing the flap gap seals and some paperwork but my reading of the Mooney paperwork from the factory web site is that it’s a lot more involved than that.

ive searched the forums here for answers but no one is quite answering these questions:

1. is it SN’s up to 107 that have this issue? 

2. What does it actually take to get the 168 LB increase?

3. Are most of the early Bravos still operating with the lower UL?

I’m looking at newer airframes as well but right now the inventory is not exactly overstocked so I want to know which years to consider.

Thanks to the community in advance for your help.

Answers to the above questions:

1 Yes

2 Here's one document that covers the first half of those numbers: https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-248.pdf

You also want the dual puck brakes which were available on serial number 108 and on.

3 No clue.

There are other reasons to get a newer airframe. Here's one: There are no parts available for the older Plessy landing gear motor. The newer Eaton gear motors would be well over $10,000.

Ones made from serial number 181 on have the fiberglass interior panels covered with ultraleather which are much better than the old Royalite panels. The interior ends up being quieter and much more durable.

[donkaye, MCFI]

34 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Answers to the above questions:

1 Yes

2 Here's one document that covers the first half of those numbers: https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-248.pdf

You also want the dual puck brakes which were available on serial number 108 and on.

3 No clue.

There are other reasons to get a newer airframe. Here's one: There are no parts available for the older Plessy landing gear motor. The newer Eaton gear motors would be well over $10,000.

Ones made from serial number 181 on have the fiberglass interior panels covered with ultraleather which are much better than the old Royalite panels. The interior ends up being quieter and much more durable.

I'm Serial #106 and I don't have that limitation.  The dual puck brakes started with Serial #107.  I missed it by one but added them later ($$$).  Both for cost and utility I should have added them a lot sooner.

Edited:  It looks like an issue only up thru Serial #52.

[exM20K]

9 hours ago, NickG said:

I’m looking at newer airframes as well but right now the inventory is not exactly overstocked so I want to know which years to consider.

If the advertised supply is not great, it is probably worth the money to buy a list of registered bravos, and send each owner a card or letter.

If you make it clear that you’re a qualified, individual buyer and not a broker, you may unearth a good candidate or two.

there used to be a company called AVPAK that sold these lists, but I can’t find a website for them.  I’m sure there are others, since I get broker solicitations from time to time.

-dan

[NickG]

3 hours ago, exM20K said:

If the advertised supply is not great, it is probably worth the money to buy a list of registered bravos, and send each owner a card or letter.

If you make it clear that you’re a qualified, individual buyer and not a broker, you may unearth a good candidate or two.

there used to be a company called AVPAK that sold these lists, but I can’t find a website for them.  I’m sure there are others, since I get broker solicitations from time to time.

-dan

There are some pretty iffy listing out there right now - from the 830LB useful load with the "easy paperwork" UL upgrade to the broker that just advertised and sold an M20M "Bravo" that still has the -A engine to the guy selling a 1994 "Ovation 3" that is an Ovation albeit with the upgraded engine (it's been painted just like an Ovation3 with the O3 on the tail)... caveat emptor

[LANCECASPER]

6 hours ago, NickG said:

There are some pretty iffy listing out there right now - from the 830LB useful load with the "easy paperwork" UL upgrade to the broker that just advertised and sold an M20M "Bravo" that still has the -A engine to the guy selling a 1994 "Ovation 3" that is an Ovation albeit with the upgraded engine (it's been painted just like an Ovation3 with the O3 on the tail)... caveat emptor

I am fairly sure that they didn't still have the -A engine in that one. I think the clueless broker probably looked at page one of the engine logbook and saw the original engine type and typed it in the ad.

In 2018 when I did the Bravo conversion on N134JF I was told by Lycoming that it was the last one they knew of that hadn't been converted. They made the price so attractive in the late 90's to do it, that anyone with any sense did it back then. (If you paid Lycoming $5500, they included 6 new -B cylinders, all of the parts to do the conversion and 40 hours labor to the shop)

[NickG]

7 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I am fairly sure that they didn't still have the -A engine in that one. I think the clueless broker probably looked at page one of the engine logbook and saw the original engine type and typed it in the ad.

In 2018 when I did the Bravo conversion on N134JF I was told by Lycoming that it was the last one they knew of that hadn't been converted. They made the price so attractive in the late 90's to do it, that anyone with any sense did it back then. (If you paid Lycoming $5500, they included 6 new -B cylinders, all of the parts to do the conversion and 40 hours labor to the shop)

Sadly they 100% had the A engine in there. Checked all the engine logs through the most recent annual….when I called the broker on it he basically said “you Mooney people! I can’t keep up with all of the different names… it’s a great plane!” I tried to explain that it was a TLS and NOT a Bravo but he did t care and sold it as a Bravo anyway.

[LANCECASPER]

29 minutes ago, NickG said:

Sadly they 100% had the A engine in there. Checked all the engine logs through the most recent annual….when I called the broker on it he basically said “you Mooney people! I can’t keep up with all of the different names… it’s a great plane!” I tried to explain that it was a TLS and NOT a Bravo but he did t care and sold it as a Bravo anyway.

You won't see the words "Bravo Conversion" in the logbooks.

It may say "complied with Mooney Service Instruction M20-101C"  or it might say "performed Lycoming SI-1479"

What was the N-number on that airplane?

[NickG]

27 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

You won't see the words "Bravo Conversion" in the logbooks.

It may say "complied with Mooney Service Instruction M20-101C"  or it might say "performed Lycoming SI-1479"

What was the N-number on that airplane?

N1087Q

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, NickG said:

N1087Q

For years after conversions were done you would see logs where it was still referred to as an "-AF1A" engine.

However this is still a TIO-540-AF1A engine, since these pictures show the engine, and it doesn't have the top oil cooling lines that are found on the Bravo conversion. (https://aircraftvx.com/a/N1087Q/photos/)

[NickG]

33 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

For years after conversions were done you would see logs where it was still referred to as an "-AF1A" engine.

However this is still a TIO-540-AF1A engine, since these pictures show the engine, and it doesn't have the top oil cooling lines that are found on the Bravo conversion. (https://aircraftvx.com/a/N1087Q/photos/)

I hope the guy that bought it realized it was not a Bravo

[LANCECASPER]

7 minutes ago, NickG said:

I hope the guy that bought it realized it was not a Bravo

Thankfully if they do a Lycoming Factory engine (new, reman or overhauled), they can still get full credit for this as a core toward a Bravo engine. 

What's ironic about this one is that it's had two prop strikes and engine teardowns. That would have been a good time to do it  . .  except Lycoming doesn't sell the 05K22169 kit anymore for the conversion. Here's what I had to do when I converted mine in 2018:

 

[NickG]

22 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Thankfully if they do a Lycoming Factory engine (new, reman or overhauled), they can still get full credit for this as a core toward a Bravo engine. 

What's ironic about this one is that it's had two prop strikes and engine teardowns. That would have been a good time to do it  . .  except Lycoming doesn't sell the 05K22169 kit anymore for the conversion. Here's what I had to do when I converted mine in 2018:

 

lol, the broker told me that you can’t even get a bravo engine anymore. I don’t think he appreciated my line of questions. Here’s the listing.
https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Single+Engine+Piston&make=MOONEY&model=M20M+BRAVO&listing_id=2426547&s-type=aircraft

 

[Fritz1]

Unusual bird, vortex generators, fancy interior, thorough inspection of engine by Lycoming guy might be helpful, 

[LANCECASPER]

11 minutes ago, Fritz1 said:

Unusual bird, vortex generators, fancy interior, thorough inspection of engine by Lycoming guy might be helpful, 

Since there is no other way now to convert to a Bravo engine without exchanging it, hopefully the person who bought it recently factored that into the price they paid. https://www.airpowerinc.com/henpl-8952   Engine plus tax, plus new mounts plus installation. Roughly $100,000.

IMO, on that early of an M20M (-AF1A engine, no gross weight increase, Plessy gear actuator, single puck brakes, vacuum speed brakes) if they paid over $150,000 they paid too much. The low time airframe, new interior would be a plus. 

 

[exM20K]

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

Since there is no other way now to convert to a Bravo engine without exchanging it, hopefully the person who bought it recently factored that into the price they paid. https://www.airpowerinc.com/henpl-8952   Engine plus tax, plus new mounts plus installation. Roughly $100,000.

IMO, on that early of an M20M (-AF1A engine, no gross weight increase, Plessy gear actuator, single puck brakes, vacuum speed brakes) if they paid over $150,000 they paid too much. The low time airframe, new interior would be a plus. 

 

That is how I’d look at this plane vs others that are available or will be. The “A” engine works, but it runs hotter than the “B”. The panel looks like it came off a U-Boat with the bare metal and switches.  VG’s are an unknown, and I’d steer clear w/o a need for them. With a $100,000 engine, $50,000 of panel, $25,000+ in paint, plus the work, time, and unknowns, and you have a new vs 700 SMOH version of this: https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/229261461/1989-mooney-m20m-bravo-piston-single-aircraft

-dan

[LANCECASPER]

42 minutes ago, exM20K said:

That is how I’d look at this plane vs others that are available or will be. The “A” engine works, but it runs hotter than the “B”. The panel looks like it came off a U-Boat with the bare metal and switches.  VG’s are an unknown, and I’d steer clear w/o a need for them. With a $100,000 engine, $50,000 of panel, $25,000+ in paint, plus the work, time, and unknowns, and you have a new vs 700 SMOH version of this: https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/229261461/1989-mooney-m20m-bravo-piston-single-aircraft

-dan

I got sold on VGs when Piper did the gross weight increase on an early Meridian I had about 20 years ago. Part of the increase was the installation of VGs and it improved the stall speed and handling. 

I put VGs on the last Bravo I owned and really liked them. I operate out of an airpark and although it's 3800 feet long at 2110 MSL, in the summer the density altitude gets high and the South runway is a little uphill. The VGs made a noticeable difference and lowered the stall speed about 8%. I could come over the numbers at 65 knots and the airplane did not feel mushy at all.  I realize it defies logic, but I saw no difference in cruise speed . . .maybe due to the air moving more efficiently. The obvious disadvantage is it's not as easy to clean the wing and you just have to be mindful of the VGs there when you're working around the airplane. 

[exM20K]

16 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I got sold on VGs when Piper did the gross weight increase on an early Meridian I had about 20 years ago. Part of the increase was the installation of VGs and it improved the stall speed and handling. 

I put VGs on the last Bravo I owned and really liked them. I operate out of an airpark and although it's 3800 feet long at 2110 MSL, in the summer the density altitude gets high and the South runway is a little uphill. The VGs made a noticeable difference and lowered the stall speed about 8 knots. I could come over the numbers at 65 knots and the airplane did not feel mushy at all.  I realize it defies logic, but I saw no difference in cruise speed . . .maybe due to the air moving more efficiently. The obvious disadvantage is it's not as easy to clean the wing and you just have to be mindful of the VGs there when you're working around the airplane. 

That is impressive, and I do have a use case for them.  One of my home dromes is 2250-2500 x 30. I hesitate for fear of losing cruise speed. Did you observe any before/after difference on the Bravo?

-dan

Edited March 23, 2024 by exM20K

[LANCECASPER]

11 minutes ago, exM20K said:

That is impressive, and I do have a use case for them.  One of my home dromes is 2250-2500 x 30. I hesitate for fear of losing cruise speed. Did you observe any before/after difference on the Bravo?

-dan

No difference in cruise speed.

The people at micro aero-dynamics told me I wouldn't see any difference in cruise speed on the Mooney, but I doubted it. I was willing to lose a couple knots. They were right.

I also felt if I ever lost the engine, having an 8 % lower stall speed would be nice in putting it in a field if I needed to.

 

[Fritz1]

No loss in cruise, 8% lower stall, really impressive, probably translates into 15% less landing distance. Dumb question: what do they do in icing?